I would gladly throw away 4 infantry with the allies to kill 1 axis infantry because the allies earn that much more than the axis. That alone unbalances the game, IMHO.
America should feel like a powerhouse??? Sure, on the condition that it has to spend in BOTH theaters and cannot dump it all DIRECTLY into one or the other. I believe that was the compromise I agreed too. My original stance is that the American territories should be halved in value and half their NOs should be removed, since then, I’ve been talked into a much more conservative vantage. My original point being that if it can act as a unified nation, it should earn what the other unified nations earn, and that’s 40-50 IPC per round, not 80-100 IPC a round.
Now people are saying that America shouldn’t have to split it’s income and the arguments they use are valid even more for England than they are for America! But they don’t want to get rid of the split for England, which I find just absolutely hilarious. Sorry, but if it’s good for the goose, it’s good for the gander, so to say.
Russia hardly needs a boost at this time. Perhaps after some of the overwhelming benefits the allies have now are stripped down, to negate a more drastic change, a buff can be added to Russia. For instance, if India was removed as a power altogether and London acts alone - as it does in every other global game - something may be done to increase Russia’s defensive capabilities.
All in all, I do agree with Geist, there is no pressure to play the allies what-so-ever. Daring and unheard of strategies can be employed because, after all, you have a two nation income lead on the Axis! Okay, so your Artillery only strategy failed, so what? In two rounds I can out build them and have equal numbers in ANY other strategy of my choice! You can’t do that with the Axis. If you try a gambit to have even a chance of winning the game, and that gambit fails, your (to continue a theme) goose is cooked.